concentration of 5-formyltetrahydrofolic acid in plant structure about cdno HOT 7 CLOSED

So the 'concentration of carbohydrate' would be a generic ontology class that wouldn't commit to how that concentration was analyzed. Under it we'd place subclasses for 1005, 1050, and their 1072 ("Carbohydrate, other" which in their semantic translates to "neither by difference or summation"). 'concentration of carbohydrate' wouldn't technically map to any USDA codes directly. A question is whether USDA wants to add a generic 'concentration of carbohydrate' code to their flat list to indicate unspecified analytic method, but that probably wouldn't be used by them, so rather useless on their side.

from cdno.

Hi @ddooley, I'm so sorry for my delayed reply I didn't get a notification, I will check what's wrong.

Thanks for finding this it's an error, it should have been associated only to USDA_NDB: 1192 and not to all the other cross-references, I will check what was wrong and create an update at the end of this month.

from cdno.

@ddooley I have some questions about this issue but before that, I just wanted to let you know that the new release will have the changes for this mistake, now 5-formyltetrahydrofolic acid is only associated to USDA_NDB: 1192.

For the granular level of tagnames from USDA/INFOODs, I associated the term 'concentration of carbohydrate' to the following code numbers from USDA:
1005 Carbohydrate, by difference
1050 Carbohydrate, by summation
1072 Carbohydrate, other

Do you think it would be better to only associate it to "1072" "carbohydrate, other"?

from cdno.

@ddooley what's your opinion about it? If you think is ok I will close this issue. Otherwise we can ask people from INFOODs and USDA?

from cdno.

@Graham-J-King What do you think? I think this might be something related to the Analytical methods class?

from cdno.

@LilyAndres @ddooley
My thoughts: I think we have to be careful in the tagging process where they may be one-to-many or many-to-one relationships inherent. I would think most people see a tag associated and assume a one-to-one relationship. There is a need for some association of evidence trail or relationship to be declared, as xrefs can get very messy to manage and lead AI astray.

from cdno.

I have fixed this issue in the latest version of CDNO (v2.2), I also tried to make 1 to 1 Xreferences with INFOODs and USDA, there are other ones that need discussion or a better definition from the sources, so we can strictly make 1 to 1 assosiations. I will close this issue now @ddooley

from cdno.